12319 pts ยท July 26, 2014
I think the viltrumites were trying to weed out the weak. Although the scourge virus did a neat little job of that for them.
#1 it works!
you keep talking about owership of bodies as though you are making headway on an interesting argument....
Oh get off it already. listen. Killing people is wrong. no matter where they are. there is no need to confuse the point because your regret
are you saying that a baby growing inside its mother because of the free choices of its parents is rape? wow! Are you taking the piss?
No. but that does not give someone the right to kill someone because they regret the natural consequences of their actions.
the mother gives implicit consent by having sex. If it is wrong to kill a born baby, it is wrong to kill an unborn baby.
This whole "does the baby own the mother" rabbit hole has extended beyond ridiculous. If the unborn baby is a person, it should be protected
Thanks for telling me what I believe! I'm curious, when do you think a fetus becomes a baby?
Once again, silencing people because of their sex is sexist. I don't need to have experienced injustice to say that injustice is wrong.
How heartless can you be!? "Your life might suck... maybe, so I better kill you now. You're welcome."
Well abstaining defiantly works better than contraception. People just have too difficult of a time controlling themselves.
Consensual sex is consent.
Given time and space, parasites will not mature into adults but babies will. Clearly they are different.
So the cutting of thr umbilical cord magically makes someone a "living person" but a second before that, they're just a clump of cells?
So your argument is level of dependency?
You've asked tbis question in another thread and you're dodging my questions too.
Barring rape, the mother consented when she had sex. Pregnancy is a natural product of sex, even if unintended.
Where else should a baby grow other than its mother's womb? It's the natural location for its development. It's not a spy or secret agent.
Please, clarify then
No. It's the crux of the debate and you are skirting the issue. If the inhabitant of the womb is a human person, they should be protected.
Ok I'll play. No, the baby does not own its mothers body.
Ah, ah ,ah! You answer my question first, you big silly.
So because the baby (vulnerable, innocent) did not get consent to grow in its own mothers womb, it can be killed. Riiight
Oh you beleive that as the level of dependency decreases the baby becomes more of a person.so if i'm older than you am I more worthy of life
I think the viltrumites were trying to weed out the weak. Although the scourge virus did a neat little job of that for them.
#1 it works!
you keep talking about owership of bodies as though you are making headway on an interesting argument....
Oh get off it already. listen. Killing people is wrong. no matter where they are. there is no need to confuse the point because your regret
are you saying that a baby growing inside its mother because of the free choices of its parents is rape? wow! Are you taking the piss?
No. but that does not give someone the right to kill someone because they regret the natural consequences of their actions.
the mother gives implicit consent by having sex. If it is wrong to kill a born baby, it is wrong to kill an unborn baby.
This whole "does the baby own the mother" rabbit hole has extended beyond ridiculous. If the unborn baby is a person, it should be protected
Thanks for telling me what I believe! I'm curious, when do you think a fetus becomes a baby?
Once again, silencing people because of their sex is sexist. I don't need to have experienced injustice to say that injustice is wrong.
How heartless can you be!? "Your life might suck... maybe, so I better kill you now. You're welcome."
Well abstaining defiantly works better than contraception. People just have too difficult of a time controlling themselves.
Consensual sex is consent.
Given time and space, parasites will not mature into adults but babies will. Clearly they are different.
So the cutting of thr umbilical cord magically makes someone a "living person" but a second before that, they're just a clump of cells?
So your argument is level of dependency?
You've asked tbis question in another thread and you're dodging my questions too.
Barring rape, the mother consented when she had sex. Pregnancy is a natural product of sex, even if unintended.
Where else should a baby grow other than its mother's womb? It's the natural location for its development. It's not a spy or secret agent.
Please, clarify then
No. It's the crux of the debate and you are skirting the issue. If the inhabitant of the womb is a human person, they should be protected.
Ok I'll play. No, the baby does not own its mothers body.
Ah, ah ,ah! You answer my question first, you big silly.
So because the baby (vulnerable, innocent) did not get consent to grow in its own mothers womb, it can be killed. Riiight
Oh you beleive that as the level of dependency decreases the baby becomes more of a person.so if i'm older than you am I more worthy of life